Inside the Star

Talking Points: Much ado about Liberal-NDP merger musings

The Issue: Though interim Liberal leader Bob Rae said the possibility of a merger with the NDP is not even being considered by his party, merger-friendly musings by Liberal MP Denis Coderre and NDP MP Pat Martin reignited the debate as the NDP began its leadership race following the state funeral for Jack Layton.

Interim Liberal leader Bob Rae said the possibility of a merger with the NDP is not even being considered by his party.

Published on Fri Sep 02 2011

The Issue: Though interim Liberal leader Bob Rae said the possibility of a merger with the NDP is not even being considered by his party, merger-friendly musings by Liberal MP Denis Coderre and NDP MP Pat Martin reignited the debate as the NDP began its leadership race following the state funeral for Jack Layton.

It doesn’t add up: From The Chronicle-Journal (Thunder Bay): “They’d be foolish to rule out a serious examination of the merits of a two-party system. Otherwise, the numbers in the foreseeable future don’t add up for anyone but the Conservatives.”

Greater representation: Justin Crann, DigitalJournal.com: “One of the greatest strengths of Canada’s political system is that we have more than two vocal, viable political parties. It allows for a greater representation of the values, needs and ambitions of the Canadian public. Heavily polarized, two-party politics, by contrast, results in more rhetoric and less substance, less effectual governance, and less representation.”

The ceiling versus the floor: David Akin, Sun Media: “The NDP is on the rise, having won more seats and more votes in all four elections since 2004. Who’s to say they can’t reach the promised land on their own? Until they hit an electoral ceiling, they’ll rightly continue without anyone’s help, thank you very much. The Liberals, meanwhile, have gone the opposite way, losing seats and votes in every election since 2004. They may not have even hit the floor.”

It’s necessary:David Olive, Toronto Star: “Progressives need a merger. So does the country, now governed by a party that commanded just 40 per cent popular approval May 2, the majority 60 per cent of Canadians having opted for progressive parties.”

Name recognition: Kady O’Malley, CBC, on Twitter: “Seriously, when the two most high-profile advocates of a Liberal/NDP merger are Denis Coderre and Pat Martin, well . . . that’s that.”

What kind of hybrid: Steve May, sudburysteve.blogspot.com: “A merged Liberal-NDP party, however, will not ultimately prove to be the animal many think it would be. And that’s because whatever kind of hybrid animal it turns out to be will be an animal of further compromise. Already both the Liberals and NDP have abandoned the kind of bold thinking that these two parties used to be champions of in the past.”

Future not bleak: John Ibbitson, Globe and Mail: “Merger can only happen when both sides can see their future clearly, and that future is bleak. But the future is not that bleak for the Conservatives’ opponents, at least not yet. The NDP honestly and reasonably believes that it has a shot at winning the next election. The Liberals honestly and reasonably believe that with a new leader, a new party structure and a clear set of policies, they will once again become the obvious governing alternative.”

Another Liberal party: Shawn Whitney, redioactive.blogspot.com: “To join with the Liberals would mean that the NDP would no longer be the independent party of the labour movement. It would in reality be just another liberal party. Forget negotiations or musings about mergers and focus on building the strength of the NDP — merge with the Liberals by winning over their base.”

Coalition, anyone: Chris Selley, National Post: “There’s a position between the status quo and an outright merger that cries out to be considered right now: working together in Parliament, should the opportunity arise. Not the M-word, but the C-word . . . The received wisdom is that the Coalition Madness of 2008 ruined the idea forever. People hate it. It’s too risky. But merging two parties is risky in itself.”

Hugging the middle: Orangeville Citizen: “The Liberals’ position today is remarkably similar to that faced by the Progressive Conservative party before its merger with the Canadian Alliance party. And opposition among Liberals to creation of a Liberal Democratic Party (the name favoured by Paul Hellyer) is also similar to that among ‘Red Tories’ in the PC party — based on concern that the merged party would stray too far from the middle of the road.”

Profit from disillusion: The Economist: “(Layton’s) successor’s first task will be to hold together a disparate parliamentary group, divided between left-wingers and moderates, between vestigial socialist centralism and the Quebec contingent’s desire for devolution. The next is to ensure that it is the NDP that profits from any disillusion with the Conservative government. One way to achieve that would be for the party to merge with the Liberals.”

Austria and Germany: Dan Gardner, Ottawa Citizen, on Twitter: “In German, one could describe the merger of the Liberals and the NDP as ‘Anschluss.’ So which would be Austria and which, ahem, Germany?”

Daniel Dale

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.